One of my colleagues and I have been wondering about this: who will assess our TESDCP? The next question that keep bugging our mind is how would they assess us? We know that there are rubrics and whatsnot but there is NO concrete example of those who get full marks for example for Self-Assessment and Reflections. On what basis the evaluation of our Teaching Philosophy would be? Based on the length of our explanation of the Teaching Philosophy? What would it be then?
One of my senior colleagues has an idea about writing his teaching philosophy in less than 40 words. His justification? UTM philosophy is written in 35 words (to be exact). So, does his teaching philosophy would get better evaluation than those who write in near to 4000 words (maximum)? Or would it be vice versa? The longer you write your teaching philosophy, the better your evaluation would be OR The shorter you write your teaching philosophy, the better your evaluation would be. Which is which?
Coming back to the question “Who will assess our TESDCP?“, the answer given by Dr Nurbiha, the Manager of Creative Multimedia and Learning Technologies (CMLT) of UTMLead, the assessors would be all of the Program Directors and a special task committee who will be formed later on as evaluators. They will be assigned to assess and evaluate our TESDCP. For example, at School of Education, there are 3 program directors. All of them would be the assessors. This is similar with the current ELPPT style of evaluation. The only difference is (I guess) is the time frame given to them to evaluate i.e. 2 months. So, within August – September, they have to look at each and every single TESDCP of academicians under their programme. There will also be other assessors assigned to assist the evaluation process.
Remember about the senior colleagues who wants to write his teaching philosophy in less than 40 words? He said that his programme director has high BP condition. So, he is helping his programme director by writing “a short and sweet” teaching philosophy. No need to increase others’ blood pressure by torturing them to read your lengthy teaching philosophy, right? Shouldn’t it be that way?